Supreme Court 17. Legal Department
2016/15663 E.
2017/7899 K.

Court :Court of First Instance

At the end of the trial of the compensation case between the parties, the case was reviewed and considered necessary upon appeal by the plaintiff’s attorney within the period of the decision given for the reasons stated in the decision regarding the dismissal of the case.:

DECISION
Acting plaintiff; his client is over 90% disabled because of the excise duty exempt as he purchased the vehicle with license plate 10 … 4 insurance policy to the defendant company, the vehicle in question following the client’s affairs … the person referred and under the administration of the road on 05/09/2015 … suffered damage as a result of a one-sided road traffic accident., in the event of an accident,the defendant has requested that a total of TL 1.500.00,including TL 1.500. 00,be collected from the company as compensation for property damage caused by his client’s vehicle and TL 1.000. 00 in the context of the loss of the vehicle, be collected from the company with the advance interest from the date of the accident.

The acting defendant pleaded not guilty.

The court decided to dismiss the case according to the claim, defence and the evidence collected; the verdict was appealed by the plaintiff’s deputy.

According to the information and documents contained in the file, there was no procedural or illegal direction in discussing and evaluating the evidence based on the court decision, a unanimous decision was made on 19/09/2017 to approve the provision found in accordance with the procedure and law by rejecting all appeals not seen in the case of the plaintiff’s attorney and to obtain the remaining approval fee of TL 2.20